The pressure on the WA government to relax it's rigid border rules

[Carringbush2010]

As a bloke dealing with family on the East Coast, and GF in Switzerland I can relate. I literally had to watch my father die on Facetime in a Tassie hospital, and missed his funeral as well, while dealing with a long distance relationship evaporating due to 2 years apart.

But it was the right move from a collective perspective.

That's why these anti-vaxx cookers draw my ire. They're a bunch of selfish *******s that cant see the bigger picture.

I agree about the anti vaxers, that's not what the thread is about. I stand by the op of the hypocrisy of our premier.

I'd also argue that our govts. could've been more flexible whilst still holding our relatively free lifestyle. That may have allowed you to see your father face to face instead of facetime. It would've allowed me to see my grandmother one more time before her passing (as mentioned in the op), there's good argument that our govts. could've been a whole lot more flexible.

That's all up for debate of course, regardless it's not a set in stone that the way the govts. handled this was the only way.

 

[Malifice]

I agree about the anti vaxers, that's not what the thread is about. I stand by the op of the hypocrisy of our premier.

What hypocrisy? The dude has followed the rules himself, even when he didnt have to.

If you want hypocrisy look no further than the British PM who was literally throwing parties at number 10 during lockdowns.

I'd also argue that our govts. could've been more flexible whilst still holding our relatively free lifestyle. That may have allowed you to see your father face to face instead of facetime. It would've allowed me to see my grandmother one more time before her passing (as mentioned in the op), there's good argument that our govts. could've been a whole lot more flexible.

That's all up for debate of course, regardless it's not a set in stone that the way the govts. handled this was the only way.

Allow that, and then you increase the probability of it getting in. No testing or so forth is 100 percent effective.

Rare as they were, there were some exemptions granted, and I could have gone overseas as long as I was prepared to stay for at least 3 months or more.

It was tough on a lot of people, but the more flexibility you allow, and the easier your exemptions, the greater the risk for the community. The harsh nature of the laws, likely saved thousands of lives in the State, and tens of thousands Nation wide.

As a liberal, I only support laws that seek to prevent or redress a harm, and are proportionate to that harm. I think we got the balance right, if possibly a little on the harsh side in some ways, they nonetheless did allow us to benefit in many others (open living for 2 years, COVID free, economy booming, businesses OK, low death toll etc).

 

[Carringbush2010]

What hypocrisy?

Well that's pretty obvious, at the time when the fed govt. distributed coin for tourism, McGowan complained about not getting our bit. Pretty hard to give it when Mark wanna keep the borders shut.

Thought I made that clear in the op.

It was tough on a lot of people, but the more flexibility you allow, and the easier your exemptions, the greater the risk for the community. The harsh nature of the laws, likely saved thousands of lives in the State, and tens of thousands Nation wide.

There is or was no reason to have this level of inflexibility, more than certain that if the WA govt. made allowances on case by case basis's there wouldn't been a problem.

Certainly for the family that were disallowed entry to see their dead son even though double vaxxed. Surely they could've been flexible about that.

I don't think there's an argument there.

 

[kranky al]

Well that's pretty obvious, at the time when the fed govt. distributed coin for tourism, McGowan complained about not getting our bit. Pretty hard to give it when Mark wanna keep the borders shut.

Thought I made that clear in the op.

There is or was no reason to have this level of inflexibility, more than certain that if the WA govt. made allowances on case by case basis's there wouldn't been a problem.

Certainly for the family that were disallowed entry to see their dead son even though double vaxxed. Surely they could've been flexible about that.

I don't think there's an argument there.

Thats where it went wrong - especially when they were allowing sports stars in and out.

 

[Power Raid]

Well that's pretty obvious, at the time when the fed govt. distributed coin for tourism, McGowan complained about not getting our bit. Pretty hard to give it when Mark wanna keep the borders shut.

Thought I made that clear in the op.

There is or was no reason to have this level of inflexibility, more than certain that if the WA govt. made allowances on case by case basis's there wouldn't been a problem.

Certainly for the family that were disallowed entry to see their dead son even though double vaxxed. Surely they could've been flexible about that.

I don't think there's an argument there.

Unfortunately McGowan was putting his personal feud with Clive and popularity over his responsibilities that come with power.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Thats where it went wrong - especially when they were allowing sports stars in and out.

Where what went wrong? If you're talking about an explosion of numbers coz sports stars were allowed in and out, well there wasn't an explosion of numbers.

If anything it proves that govts. can be nuanced and flexible instead of 'this is the rule, take it or leave it'

It just proves the hypocrisy if anything, not where it went wrong.

 

[Malifice]

Unfortunately McGowan was putting his personal feud with Clive and popularity over his responsibilities that come with power.

Personal feud? Palmer was trying to squeeze 28 odd billion from the State of WA for Gods sake.

That's like 20 grand per person!

McGowan, as Premier, put an end to that.

And that wasnt personal, it all started back with the Libs in WA under Barnett (who again, ****ed it up by allowing Palmer in in the first place before doing an about face). McGowan was left holding the ball, and being forced to enact legislation to stop it.

 

[Power Raid]

Personal feud? Palmer was trying to squeeze 28 odd billion from the State of WA for Gods sake.

That's like 20 grand per person!

McGowan, as Premier, put an end to that.

And that wasnt personal, it all started back with the Libs in WA under Barnett (who again, f’ed it up by allowing Palmer in in the first place before doing an about face). McGowan was left holding the ball, and being forced to enact legislation to stop it.

so abuse of powers? and not letting natural justice and denying the courts the ability to carry out their duties

 

[Carringbush2010]

Off to Melbourne at last!

 

[Malifice]

so abuse of powers? and not letting natural justice and denying the courts the ability to carry out their duties

The High Court ruled the legislation McGowan enacted as being lawful. You dont get much more natural justice than that.

And it's not like Clive cant afford some pretty decent lawyers either.

Palmer is a ******* parasite. The sooner we're rid of him for good, the better.

 

[Power Raid]

The High Court ruled the legislation McGowan enacted as being lawful. You dont get much more natural justice than that.

And it's not like Clive cant afford some pretty decent lawyers either.

Palmer is a ******* parasite. The sooner we're rid of him for good, the better.

perhaps I misunderstood why you raised the legal issue in context to the issue

 

[Forward Press]

so abuse of powers? and not letting natural justice and denying the courts the ability to carry out their duties

Considering the amount of lawsuits launched and variety of courts visited by a person who said his favourite pastime was litigation, this claim does not stand up to any amount of scrutiny whatsoever.

At every step of the way, every court has ruled in favour of McGowan over Palmer so far. If the defamation lawsuit goes to the former again over the latter, it would be entirely unsurprising too.

 

[Power Raid]

Considering the amount of lawsuits launched and variety of courts visited by a person who said his favourite pastime was litigation, this claim does not stand up to any amount of scrutiny whatsoever.

At every step of the way, every court has ruled in favour of McGowan over Palmer so far. If the defamation lawsuit goes to the former again over the latter, it would be entirely unsurprising too.

so why did McGowan make the claim he called a state of emergency to protect WA for a claim against Clive? This to me stinks.

I think Clive is a corrupt man who sat in bed with known corrupt WA and Qld Premiers. Nevertheless, I expect our governments to act with integrity and abuse of powers is exactly the opposite.

 

[Forward Press]

so why did McGowan make the claim he called a state of emergency to protect WA for a claim against Clive? This to me stinks.

I think Clive is a corrupt man who sat in bed with known corrupt WA and Qld Premiers. Nevertheless, I expect our governments to act with integrity and abuse of powers is exactly the opposite.

If you cannot understand why a Premier and his government rushed through legislation to prevent their electorate from being liable for $20,000 per person, then I won't bother entertaining your musings. The government's responsibility is to their people, not an out of towner with big pockets.

The legislation was also held to be lawful by the relevant courts - which you conveniently ignore.

 

[Carn The Berries]

If you cannot understand why a Premier and his government rushed through legislation to prevent their electorate from being liable for $20,000 per person, then I won't bother entertaining your musings. The government's responsibility is to their people, not an out of towner with big pockets.

The legislation was also held to be lawful by the relevant courts - which you conveniently ignore.

The entire issue is actually quite interesting. The High Court rulings, while vindication for the WA Government, do raise some interesting questions. Part of the judgement stated that the changes to the Act did amount to a change in legal rights, but this didn't breach separation of powers. In effect, it validated that a government can unilaterally change an Agreement without regard to how that impacts legal rights afforded in the Agreement (and that it can unilaterally change an Agreement via an act of parliament). I understand the view they have drawn but I'm not sure it sits entirely well with me. Granted, it isn't something that is used very often, but in the wrong hands it could have the potential to create significant political risk, or could be used as a vehicle for political retribution.

 

[Power Raid]

If you cannot understand why a Premier and his government rushed through legislation to prevent their electorate from being liable for $20,000 per person, then I won't bother entertaining your musings. The government's responsibility is to their people, not an out of towner with big pockets.

The legislation was also held to be lawful by the relevant courts - which you conveniently ignore.

how about not causing the damage and placing the electorate at risk in the first place?

 

[Kwality]

Australia led the world in COVID infections this week and the experts say 'it's not over'

With the country in middle of an election campaign, a war raging in Ukraine and cost of living rising, COVID-19 has dropped off the radar for some Australians. But experts say the number of daily cases and deaths is "extraordinary".

www.abc.net.au

"In Perth [where I'm based], they're saying it could be 20,000 to 25,000 cases a day soon," he said.

"And we have had a lot of anecdotal reports of people not testing themselves, or when they get a positive test not recording the result with the government.

"We're a bit stuck," he said.

We're treating COVID as if it's a cold, and saying no masks, play on.

"But there are still a lot of people coming into hospitals with COVID, and of course there's no staff," he said.

 

[Power Raid]

Australia led the world in COVID infections this week and the experts say 'it's not over'

With the country in middle of an election campaign, a war raging in Ukraine and cost of living rising, COVID-19 has dropped off the radar for some Australians. But experts say the number of daily cases and deaths is "extraordinary".

www.abc.net.au

"In Perth [where I'm based], they're saying it could be 20,000 to 25,000 cases a day soon," he said.

"And we have had a lot of anecdotal reports of people not testing themselves, or when they get a positive test not recording the result with the government.

"We're a bit stuck," he said.

We're treating COVID as if it's a cold, and saying no masks, play on.

it's a non event in the post vax world

I can't believe it is news worthy these days

 

[Kwality]

it's a non event in the post vax world

I can't believe it is news worthy these days

The numbers or the real state of the hospital staff ?

 

[Power Raid]

The numbers or the real state of the hospital staff ?

our poor hospital system relates to how they are run and funded

the covid numbers are expected and the outcome as expected, thus media will have to find something new and shiny after the election

 

[Kwality]

our poor hospital system relates to how they are run and funded

the covid numbers are expected and the outcome as expected, thus media will have to find something new and shiny after the election

Sure it may not be headline material but covid has not gone away. Like the road toll it wont go away.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Sure it may not be headline material but covid has not gone away. Like the road toll it wont go away.

When was the last we heard of the road toll? I'd argue covid gets more attention than the road toll.

 

[Malifice]

The entire issue is actually quite interesting. The High Court rulings, while vindication for the WA Government, do raise some interesting questions. Part of the judgement stated that the changes to the Act did amount to a change in legal rights, but this didn't breach separation of powers. In effect, it validated that a government can unilaterally change an Agreement without regard to how that impacts legal rights afforded in the Agreement (and that it can unilaterally change an Agreement via an act of parliament). I understand the view they have drawn but I'm not sure it sits entirely well with me. Granted, it isn't something that is used very often, but in the wrong hands it could have the potential to create significant political risk, or could be used as a vehicle for political retribution.

It doesn't sit well with me either (that the State can legislate itself out of liability or out of a contractual obligation).

Of course the flip side is the Crown has always had immunity, and contracts themselves are bound to legislation (you cant contract something that contradicts legislation).

Doing it after the fact, is a concern.

While governments can do it (and there is precedent for it) it's not the sort of thing you want to be doing often, or else you wreck confidence in contracting with the State.

 

[Carn The Berries]

It doesn't sit well with me either (that the State can legislate itself out of liability or out of a contractual obligation).

Of course the flip side is the Crown has always had immunity, and contracts themselves are bound to legislation (you cant contract something that contradicts legislation).

Doing it after the fact, is a concern.

While governments can do it (and there is precedent for it) it's not the sort of thing you want to be doing often, or else you wreck confidence in contracting with the State.

Exactly right, particularly in the mining space. One of Australia's competitive advantages is the low political risk (compared to say, investing in Africa). If you pull this kind of thing too many times we end up just like them (perhaps without the violent coups).

 

[Kwality]

When was the last we heard of the road toll? I'd argue covid gets more attention than the road toll.

By all means make that comparison. My post you replied is a little more nuanced.